MUHAMMAD SHABBIR vs GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB and 18 others
This petition for special leave to appeal arises from an order of the Punjab Service Tribunal rejecting the petitioner's claim to seniority from an anterior date. The petitioner had previously been removed from service under Section 11-A of the Punjab Service Act, 1974, but successfully avoided its application by successfully contending before the Tribunal that he was to be treated as a fresh appointee with effect from a date outside the statutory period, resulting in his reinstatement. Subsequently, the petitioner claimed seniority based on regular appointment from an earlier date. The core legal question is whether a civil servant, having successfully avoided the application of Section 11-A of the Punjab Service Act, 1974 by claiming appointment from a later date, can subsequently claim seniority from an earlier date. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner could not approbate and reprobate by taking inconsistent stances regarding his date of appointment for different service benefits. The petition was accordingly dismissed, establishing the principle that a litigant cannot blow hot and cold by adopting mutually contradictory positions in service matters.
- Whether a civil servant who avoids removal under Section 11-A of the Punjab Service Act, 1974 by claiming a later appointment date can subsequently claim seniority from an earlier date?
- Is a civil servant permitted to take contradictory stances regarding the effective date of his appointment for different service benefits?
- Section 11-A, Punjab Service Act 1974
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--By an order dated 2-6-1979 the petitioner was removed from service under Section 11-A of the Punjab Service Act, 1974. This Section read as follows:- "Notwithstanding anything contained in his terms and conditions of service, a civil servant appointed or promoted during the period from the first day of January, 1972 to the fifth day of July, 1977, may be removed from service or reverted to his lower post, without notice, by the Governor of the Punjab or a person authorised by him in this behalf on such date as the Governor of the Punjab or, as the case may be, the person so authorised, may in public interest, direct."
' The petitioner challenged this order in appeal before the Punjab Service Tribunal. His case was that even though he had -been serving the Provincial Government between the date mentioned in the Section, he was to be treated as a fresh appointee with effect from 3-9-1977. Consequently, he was not one of those persons to whom the section 11-A applied. His contention was accepted and a direction with regard to his reinstatement in service was given.
2. The dispute in this petition for special leave to appeal relates to the seniority of the petitioner. His claim to seniority is founded on the assertion that he was a regular appointee under the Government with effect from 29-9-1975. The Punjab Service Tribunal has rejected his claim. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court. And it was on the basis of this assertion that he was able to avoid application of Section 11-A to him. It therefore does not lie with him now to claim that for the purpose of seniority he should be treated as regular appointee from an anterior date. The learned Tribunal was therefore justified in rejecting his claim. The petition is dismissed.